Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy Your Rights Online

Officials secretly RFID'd at Internet Summit 216

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the thats-just-creapy dept.
ewoudenberg writes "A Washington Times article reports that researchers managed to gain entrance to the Internet and technology conference in Switzerland last week only to discover that the summit's badges contained undisclosed RFID chips. The badges were handed out to more than 50 prime ministers, presidents and other high-level officials from 174 countries, including the United States."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Officials secretly RFID'd at Internet Summit

Comments Filter:
  • Cool. (Score:5, Funny)

    by torpor (458) <ibisum.gmail@com> on Sunday December 14, 2003 @11:42AM (#7716635) Homepage Journal
    Politicians should be made to wear RFID's from the day they enter office in service of the public, to the day they leave that office.

    "For the people, and of the people" can only be effective if the people keep a track on such people with power ...
    • Re:Cool. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Zebbers (134389)
      umm
      what use would the RFID be? it doesnt permit tracking a 'la gps...which would really be the only reason to take a 'politician'.

      I despise the political system and politicians too...but that really isnt an insightful comment. A politician has a job, just like you. Should you be bagged and tagged to make sure you arent talking to competitors.

      And besides whether we should...like I said, you must not understand RFID cause it would be useless to track people outside of a small, definitive area.
      • Re:Cool. (Score:3, Insightful)

        by torpor (458)
        A politician has a job, just like you. Should you be bagged and tagged to make sure you arent talking to competitors.

        A politicians job is far more important than mine. It has its risks, it has its responsibilities.

        Politicians should be held accountable for every single thing they do while they are on the job. Its the only way to ensure we -the people- don't get screwed ...

      • Re:Cool. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ATMAvatar (648864) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @01:22PM (#7717583) Journal
        Many people are closely monitored in the workplace. Why should politicians be any different?
        • Re:Cool. (Score:3, Interesting)

          by idlemachine (732136)
          Apparently the Australian truth in advertising laws were modified to explicitly exclude politicians from being held accountable to them. Then again, they're also allowed to edit the *official* records of Parliamentary proceedings, just in case they ever stumble during a speech and actually reveal their true intentions. The more power and responsibility you have, the higher the level of accountability should be that comes with it. That we constantly absolve our politicians in this way just makes me think w
        • Because killing or capturing you doesn't throw the entire country into chaos and endanger national security.

          If anybody can monitor the President's location, that includes the bad guys.
    • Re:Cool. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Councilor Hart (673770) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @12:41PM (#7717212)
      They do have a private life, you know.
      It is not our concern who they sleep with, eat with, talk to in their personal time.
      It is not because they hold a public office, they don't have a right to privacy.
      Everything that doesn't influence the execution of their mandate is not our concern, and should remain private.
      Public life != Big Brother
      • I agree (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mcc (14761) <amcclure@purdue.edu> on Sunday December 14, 2003 @03:53PM (#7718863) Homepage
        And I will take gladly endorse that viewpoint just as soon as the same courtesy is extended to consumers and private citizens.
        • Re:I agree (Score:2, Interesting)

          Yes, privacy is an important issue. Don't (try to) violate mine, or I will go beserk.
          Now, I defend this right for both parties because you can not expect that they uphold your right if you continually violate theirs.
          By defending their rights, I am defending mine.
          As to Clinton having an affair. I don't regard that as a cause for impeachment. That is a problem between him, his wife and his mistress. Thus a matter of his privacy.
          On the other hand, he had an affair with a White House employee. That could
      • They do have a private life, you know.
        It is not our concern who they sleep with, eat with, talk to in their personal time.
        It is not because they hold a public office, they don't have a right to privacy.
        Everything that doesn't influence the execution of their mandate is not our concern, and should remain private.
        Public life != Big Brother

        I think that's exactly the point the parent post was trying to make.

        In other words, if politicians wouldn't want it, the people probably dont want it either.

        A private c
      • "I don't give a stuff who they're screwing in private. I want to know who they're screwing in public!"
    • Re:Cool. (Score:1, Offtopic)

      by Zapdos (70654)
      Your idea is so dumb. There is this little thing called National Security.

      Location matters not.

      This would help get an elected official assassinated, perhaps their family and or children hurt.

    • Re:Cool. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Politburo (640618)
      Hi. Politicians are still citizens. They still have the rights we have. Sorry.
    • Re:Cool. (Score:3, Funny)

      by Handpaper (566373)
      It's 01:30. Do you know where your Congressman is?

      • It's 01:30. Do you know where your Congressman is?


        Why, he's right there in my crosshairs...


        Seriously, wouldn't this be too much of a security risk, even if it's just in one building and not everywhere they go?

    • If I had moderation points, I'd mod this up.
    • by t0ny (590331)
      Wow, then all you need to do is find out how to detect RFIDs, and the time for psychotics to stalk and kill them would be drastically reduced.

      What a well thought out idea!

      • by torpor (458)
        If you've got the tech to make RFID work, you've got the tech to protect someone from thugs.

        Duh.
      • If they were so easily ID'd, wouldn't that encourage them to stop making choices about our lives that we felt justified murdering them over?
        • by t0ny (590331)
          Why, who are you planning to murder?

          • That Senator Hatch bastard could do with a good dose of syphilis or something equally nice.

            Scuse me, but whenever I talk about killing prominent political figures over non-encrypted channels I like to mention words like terrorism, echelon, cocaine and nuclear.
    • Having politicians wear RFIDs is only useful to keep Texas Democrats from leaving the state.

      Other than that it would present a personal danger to politicians and their families.

      I guess the danger would outweigh the one benefit.
      Or are we short sighted?

  • by bruthasj (175228) <bruthasj@ya[ ].com ['hoo' in gap]> on Sunday December 14, 2003 @11:43AM (#7716637) Homepage Journal
    With RFID.

    Note for the humor-impaired: this is a joke.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Well, one can hope that Ossama bin Laden got to this conference too. It might help the CIA to get him too ;o)
    • Dups provide a chance to post additional insights that emerge from the original story. I find that reading all the +5 comments from the first posting of the story provides more food for thought once the dup appears.
  • by brian728s (666853) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @11:44AM (#7716653)
    Lightbulbs are now being labeled a terrorist device, used to spy on people and documents at places including the pentagon, the whitehouse, and even the United Nations building. Hackers used the light bulbs to send out light, which when intercepted by their illegal hacker tools called "eyes", can identify diplomats, and read classified documents. Americans can rest assured that their safety is being protected by operation "hammerbulb". Democrats are concerned about a lack of hammers to complete the operation, but administration officials assure them that rocks can be used if the shortage proves true.
  • Privacy (Score:5, Funny)

    by penguinoid (724646) <spambait001@yahoo.com> on Sunday December 14, 2003 @11:44AM (#7716654) Homepage Journal
    They met to discuss privacy matters on the internet (among other things).
    I wonder what their policy will be?
  • duplicate (Score:1, Informative)

    by hugesmile (587771)
    Wasn't this already discussed? [slashdot.org]
  • For those of you who are experiencing the sensation of "deja vu all over again" please see WSIS Physical Security Cracked. [slashdot.org]
  • by Doc Ruby (173196) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @11:47AM (#7716688) Homepage Journal
    I know the Slashdot editors don't read the story submissions, because my earthshattering submissions are never accepted. But do they even read the Slashdot homepage [slashdot.org]? They might notice duplicate stories [slashdot.org].
    • The Slashcode already extracts URLs from stories into sidebars. Why not a revision that compares those URLs in a submission to those in past submissions? Then editors can see whether a submission is a dup as they go through their incoming queue.
    • I'll bet it would be possible to use a spam-filter-esque system to compare the text of the articles and the links they point to. By weighting heavily the text of the links and the headings in the linked documents, they could give stories a dup-score and the editors would be shown a list sorted from highest-to-lowest.

      Wait... it would have to have a limit on the number of stories it goes back, or else it will compare this one story to every other story in the database! Any ideas?

      • The filter must compare the submission to every article, or the omitted archives might contain dup's. Why not? How about a Bayesian filter? How about a hash of the "salient" details against which a dup would match?
      • I'll bet it would be possible to use a spam-filter-esque system to compare the text of the articles....

        I bet it would be possible to check the spelling of the articles posted using a "spell checker". I recall using one in the late 70s on my student Unix system.

    • CmdrTaco hasn't read this site in years.

    • They might notice duplicate stories.

      I would think you're new here... but since you've got a low UID, you're just hijacking your faters /. account, right?
      All the little slashbots around have to realize, dupes will never disappear.
      Taco doesn't want to code a dupe-finder, and the editors just don't care.
      • I would think you're new here... but since you've got a low UID

        173196 low? That's a joke, right? ;-)

        For what (little) it's worth, the problem is getting worse. A few years ago, when I was new here, there was hardly ever a dupe. As the site's grown, though, and I suppose the number of submissions has increased, they've started slipping through more and more often.

        I wouldn't say it's a huge problem - after all, just because something's been discussed before doesn't stop us all discussing it again (eg Wind
      • by Doc Ruby (173196)
        I've been reading dup's on Slashdot since 1998, although my current UID dates from later. Help me write a dup-matcher filter for the editors' submissions queue, and we can help do something about it. The Slashcode is OSS, so we can back up our complaints with constructive solutions by patching the code.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 14, 2003 @11:48AM (#7716704)
    Badges? We don't need no stinkin badges!
  • Good. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Space cowboy (13680) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @11:50AM (#7716738) Journal
    I hope the media catch hold of it and hype it to hell and beyond. Get some high-flying politico commentators saying how they should have been informed.

    Understanding about fire being hot often comes after one has been burnt. Perhaps they'll feel that they shouldn't be "spied on" without their knowledge. Perhaps it might influence decisions they make in future...

    Simon.
    • Re:Good. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by JohnnyBigodes (609498)
      Good luck.. they (the politicians) will mostly complain about THEIR privacy, citing matters of national security. The people's privacy will always be watched in some way or another due to the need of "a general well-being".
    • And watch ... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Lead Butthead (321013)
      how quickly they will forget and proceed to do on to their citizens what they complain loudly of.
  • by segment (695309) <sil @ p o l i t rix.org> on Sunday December 14, 2003 @11:51AM (#7716741) Homepage Journal

    Washington Post has their own agendas politically when it comes to reporting. Sure it's pretty shitty to be monitored, but there is nothing stating that any information used was used for anything other than maybe for the sake of having some card manufacturers new card being tested.

    Remember intelligence agencies from all over the place keep tabs on each other via other means (ECHELON, HUMINT, OSINT, IMINT, SIGNIT), so I doubt this was anything to be concerned with. Strictly something `chick' to report on. It's far more easier to set up assets to bang (screw/lay/fsck) one of these guys for info, than it would to keep watch of what they do.

    User gets in car to go to summit, user's Eazypass or other form of cardpaymentsys tracks what exits he uses via tolls paid. User stops at gasoline station, credit card is used, card information is transmitted. User talks the beltway, cameras capture this. Get the picture? Everyone else sure did. Again other than this being all the rage (RFID's) I doubt it was something major, but surely someone with agendas sees it to be so. When they can produce something absolute that was used with this information, not just 'oh my look at this an RFID story' than I'll worry.

    PS... Proof doesn't mean `hey we're the Foobar Newspaper

    • by grondu (239962)
      Washington Post has their own agendas politically when it comes to reporting.

      The link is to the Washington Times , not the Washington Post.
      • shit i need to wake up... thanx and doh! but in essence there still isnt anything more than some rfid bs... And I should have known it was the times because of the ugly ass colors they use
  • Summary (Score:4, Interesting)

    by FTL (112112) * <slashdot&neil,fraser,name> on Sunday December 14, 2003 @11:53AM (#7716763) Homepage
    To summarise the article, a group of reporters were pissed that they weren't invited to attend the conference. They disected a security card, and found (shock, horror) that it contained features designed to maintain security at said conference. Since this is the only dirt they managed to find, they spin it up into a sky-is-falling end-of-the-world privacy story.

    I'd have a lot more respect for activist reporters if they would report the facts without hype. It's not the second coming, it's possibly a minor infraction of the Swiss information laws.

    • Re:Summary (Score:5, Funny)

      by Crash Culligan (227354) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @12:47PM (#7717267) Journal
      To summarise the article, a group of reporters were pissed that they weren't invited to attend the conference.

      That's no surprise. If I recall correctly, the G7 summits are intended to be discussions on global economic policy, to which none of the affected people (pretty much everybody but government officials) are ever invited. (In fact, I don't hear of many economists going to those conferences either; if I'm wrong, please correct.)

      As for press not getting in, sure you may loathe muckraker reporting (many people do), but sometimes there's just too much muck to allow to pile up. Do you really want your government to be deciding elements of policy without any input from its constituency? That's becoming the norm, and guerilla reporting may soon be the only way the operation of said government can come to light.

      They disected a security card, and found (shock, horror) that it contained features designed to maintain security at said conference. Since this is the only dirt they managed to find, they spin it up into a sky-is-falling end-of-the-world privacy story.

      Yeah, I see where the article could sound like sour grapes. But then there's something to be said for the irony of the situation, and I'm glad that someone was in there to highlight it.

      1. Government officials attend privacy and security conference.
      2. Reporters crash privacy and security conference, demonstrating lack of security.
      3. Reporters analyze badges from privacy and not-security conference and find RFID tags, demonstrating lack of privacy.
      4. Article about lack-of-privacy and not-security conference reaches the public.
      5. ???
      6. Privacy!!

      I'm not perfectly sure, but I think that next-to-the-last step should be Citizens of the world slap their respective governments upside the head and scream "What were you goobers THINKING??"

      At least, that's my take on it...

    • Re:Summary (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ironica (124657) <pixel@NoSPAm.boondock.org> on Sunday December 14, 2003 @01:56PM (#7717881) Journal
      a group of reporters were pissed that they weren't invited to attend the conference.

      And from the article, there's no indication that they're the same as the group of researchers who snuck in.

      They disected a security card, and found (shock, horror) that it contained features designed to maintain security at said conference.

      If that's what it was for, how come the security people couldn't tell them that? I'm glad you were able to get more info out of them than the researchers were.

      Since this is the only dirt they managed to find, they spin it up into a sky-is-falling end-of-the-world privacy story.

      The fact that they faked their way in so easily was the first bit of dirt they dug up. The fact that there were undisclosed monitoring devices in the badges was the next. The final blow was that they couldn't get any info from security about the monitoring, and basically that the conference violated at least three privacy laws in the current jurisdiction.

      And that if this is how it goes in Switzerland, how will things go in Tunisia next year?

      If you figure it's no biggie, maybe you're right. But then again, if we send a bunch of prime ministers and other politicos to all congregate in a single place, and then we put tags on them so that we know their comings and goings, and who is talking with whom, and then we don't have any apparent plan to purge that info at any point... how easy will it be for every terrorist in the world to strike against their least favorite government at next year's conference? This seems vaguely important to me.
  • Countermeasures (Score:5, Interesting)

    by G4from128k (686170) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @11:53AM (#7716764)
    I wonder if someone is goign to make a killing by selling little RFID chip & reader detectors. Richard Stallman suggested RFID detectors and destroyers [rfidprivacy.org] as a challenge for privacy adocates. Perhaps clothing with conductive/dissapative threads will be the next fashion trend (just don't count on your cellphone ringing if its inside your pocket ;) ).
  • I would think that the information provided by the RFID tags would be invaluable - not in terms of violating privacy but for the planning of future conferences. I'd gladly wear RFID chips in my conference badge if it lead to improved trafficking for future conferences. One doesn't attend conferences for the privacy.
  • by 11223 (201561)
    Perhaps if they RFID-tagged Slashdot submissions, they could detect dups at a distance, before they were posted.
  • Creapy? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Creepy. It's just CREEPY. I am not sure Creapy is even a word. Jeez.
  • From the that's-just-crappy dept, with an apostrophe.
  • We should take this with a grain of salt; this is the Washington Times we're dealing with. They have a history of making up news stories. I wouldn't trust them.
    • Re:Washington Times (Score:4, Interesting)

      by canajin56 (660655) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @02:53PM (#7718389)
      Everybody makes up news stories. Like when NBC needed to show that GM trucks explode when struck from the side. They said the fuel tank ruptured. But what they did was overfil the gas tank, didn't screw the gas cap on (Just left it sitting on top) and then they strapped remotely detonated explosive under the truck to ignite the gas when it spilt out! And even then, the flames went out after a few seconds, so they had to "creativly" edit it to make the fire look worse. Here is a summary [whatreallyhappened.com] Although he did get one thing wrong: NBC hasn't died yet, in the 4 years since it happened. Hmm, I also recall something about slowing down the tape, so it looked like the truck they hit it with was going fairly slow, but it was actually going really fast.
  • by Zed2K (313037) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @12:57PM (#7717382)
    That someone hit the bathroom at 12:30pm and then again at 3:30pm. They also exited the room for a smoke break after their bathroom break. Oh and don't forget the super secret buying of a Snickers bar at 3:35pm.
  • WTF, Over... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Sylver Dragon (445237) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @01:00PM (#7717412) Journal
    Maybe its just me, but this seems like a whole lot of noise over nothing. Those badges were probably security badges. You know, the kind many of us corporate workers wear every day to work. If you are one of those workers who have to swipe your ID badge in front of a little box that goes beep, and an LED turns green, and the door opens, the you are carrying an RFID tag (possibly even a smart card, but this is not as common). This is no big deal, its simply a way to control access. Technically, it provides some employee tracking, but its also very useful for security.
    Heck, even parking garages are using these for employees now. My girlfriend has a little card (HID Prox card), which she uses at work to get into and out of the parking complex for work. Myself, I work at a company that builds physical security systems, so I work with these things every day. And, I find, that most of the privacy concerns are way overblown. Though, I still don't like the idea of carrying one on me, I am a bit of a privacy nut afterall.
    If anything, this article sounds like a bunch of reporters got pissed, because they weren't allowed into a closed door conference, and broke the rules to get an access badge, and then reported on the evil RFID tag in the card, despite this being a very common thing, especially in places where security is an issue.

    • Hipocrisy? (Score:2, Insightful)

      RFID concerns are overblown, except when the tags are on YOU.
      • Re:Hipocrisy? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Sylver Dragon (445237) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @01:34PM (#7717699) Journal
        No, RFID concers are overblown. I just happen to be one of the people that believes in erring on the side of caution. Truth is, those little suckers take some good sized equipment to read from any worthwhile distance, so carrying my work ID badge on me at all times (I just keep it in my wallet) really isn't a cause for concern. What bothers me, is the idea of any government of corporation trying to hide these things on me, so that they can track me when the technology advances far enough for the readers to be small and have good range.
        Also, note that I did say privacy nut, which usually implies being irrational. Which many of my fears about privacy are, but I'll hang onto them, just in case one of them is right.

    • If anything, this article sounds like a bunch of reporters got pissed, because they weren't allowed into a closed door conference, and broke the rules to get an access badge

      The original press release reported on /. (here [slashdot.org]) didn't mention that group of reporters at all, and this article doesn't actually discuss any link between the researchers and the reporters. I get the impression that the Washington Times thought the discussion of the pirate radio broadcast gave the story a little more color for those w
  • Self-Defense (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Quantum-Sci (732727) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @01:13PM (#7717510) Homepage
    For those who doubt the concerns about RFID, it's about who controls your own information: you... or others.

    We will get no regulation of the uses RFID is put to, while the Party is in power, and so it's up to us to sort this out.

    Be advised that cellphone mfgrs are now adding technology that PUSHes ads to you. Will you be able to turn it off? Doubtful; if all the carriers do it, there's no place else to go.

    And of course CDMA has always had geo-location... they promise it's only used to catch indicted criminals, but that claim is very doubtful, given some recent events.

    Delegates at a conference could be identified as they approach their car. Obscuring codes don't matter; a sample could be taken at any time prior, at great distance with a parabolic dish. Soldiers could be accurately geo-located by the enemy.

    Did you know that all GM cars since 1999 have black boxes in them, which are NOT being used to help you understand what happened 5 seconds before an accident, but to INDICT you for that accident, and expose you to civil litigation as well. Your inanimate *car* has become a prosecution witness against you, even though your own wife isn't supposed to be forced to testify against you.

    This is the difference between the old way, and the neo-way, of managing the citizens. The deeper question is, why is our society becoming more and more adversarial, so fast? How do Nordic countries and Canada, get away with cooperation, rather than ever strengthening offense and defense, every day? They don't worry about NOT being something, like we Americans do. Double-plus ungood.

    You say that when out in public, you have no expectation of privacy? True, but RFID expands that 'public' from your immediate surroundings (which you are aware of, and choose to inhabit), to the known universe, and for all time. If in 10 years it is considered treasonous to question RFID, some of us will be screwed, now, won't we? We all go places we'd like to keep private sometimes, now, don't we? Care to give that up, for no good reason other than FEAR?! Of our own government/corporate oligopoly? How much of your day do you spend in FEAR?! WTF are you afraid of NOW, FGS?!

    RFID is a great idea for inventory, but should be disabled/disablable when purchased. I doubt those chips now in tires, can be disabled, given the vulcanization process. And tags will soon be microscopic.

    RFID has no business on a person, as long as corporations and politicians behave adversarially toward their public at the highest levels.

  • Maybe slashdot should add RFID to the stories, so that when they come the 2nd time around we can detect them right away...
  • "The badges were handed out to more than 50 prime ministers, presidents and other high-level officials from 174 countries, including the United States."

    so each official was from an average of 3.5 countries?
  • RFID is nothing new (Score:3, Informative)

    by dacarr (562277) on Sunday December 14, 2003 @02:03PM (#7717944) Homepage Journal
    They use it to track runners for the LA Marathon. No biggie.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Now that's secrecy for you.
  • It didn't take long for that technology to be misused now did it? I can see the day when you go by RFID ready ad displays in the mall, and will be taylored to your 'interests' as they carefully read what stores you've been to and feed a 'revelevent ad'. Pretty soon RFID TVs will be made too, all sorts of fun and interesting uses for this technology will pop up! yay! Take me now Lord.............
  • Slashdot (and now The Washington Times) seems unable to do an RFID story without a strong sense of panick. While this story has even less detail than the one posted a few days ago, it is pretty clear that nobody was being "secretly tracked". People attending the event presented their badges to enter a meeting and that event was logged. It isn't like they can tell where you are withing a meter at any time. It also isn't entirely clear that these are RFID badges.
  • by KC7GR (473279) on Monday December 15, 2003 @02:08AM (#7722604) Homepage Journal
    AP SPOOFWIRE -- Two microwave ovens were seriously damaged today at the Internet and Technology Conference in Switzerland when numerous conference attendees, annoyed when they discovered that their badges contained RFID chips, tried to disable those same chips through "nuking" them in the ovens.

    Cafeteria staff were stunned by the spectacle produced when each oven was crammed full of badges, and the 'Start' button pressed. "I'd always heard stories about what would happen if you put anything with metal in it into a microwave" said head cook Rowena Splatt, "But I never thought I would ever see it in action! That horrible buzzing noise, the showers of sparks -- though I will admit that all those colors were kind of pretty -- but the smell! Oh, that was the worst part!! It reminded us all of last week's liver-and-onion special, with hints of burned cranberries and overcooked zucchini..."

    Security personnel monitoring the RFID receiver systems also reported strange occurrences. "It was like thousands of these tinny little Munchkin-like voices screamed 'Help Meeeeeee!' all at once" reported Lt. Take-Emin Andbookem, head of security for the event. "And you wouldn't believe the volume! I've still got six people in the hospital, getting checked for hearing damage."

    The event's organizers have reported that the badges will be reissued -- without RFID chips, this time -- and that the homogenized melted-together masses of the other badges will be made into holiday mobiles which will also feature unused AOL 9.0 CDs and old 30-pin memory SIMMs.

  • I double-dog, thirty resolution dare them. Bring it; maybe they'll send in UN troops from Zimbabwe to Marina del Rey, CA (33.9803N, 118.4405W). Or maybe they'll RBL everything .us/.com/.net/.org/.gov to europe.... oh wait, that's 99% of the net; passive-agressive seems to be the French way. Or, bring UNSECO in on it, let them make dozens of toothless resolutions: "The UN has become a point-less debating society" that panders to the little Fidel's of the world, along with the finger-pointing and empty thr

"Mach was the greatest intellectual fraud in the last ten years." "What about X?" "I said `intellectual'." ;login, 9/1990

Working...